Two Twentieth Century Veterans Go Back to Work. 
Speaking Sunday 28 with my professional team about the coincidence of the skyrocketing joblessness and the surprising revival of two literary giants of the last century, John Galt, of Ayn Rand's 1957 masterwork, "Atlas Shrugged," re big government in the Soviet Union and
in America, and Winnie-the-Pooh, of A.A. Milne's stock market bubble masterworks ("Winnie-the-Pooh," 1926, "The House at Pooh Corner," 1928) that became a dominant dystopian fairy tale during the Great Depression. John Galt was the Adam Smith ideal of a laissez -faire business tyro who resisted the sovietizing of the American landscape, wherein all private enterprise was forced to join the public sector and obey the commands of Congress. Steve Moore, Wall Street Journal, writes trenchantly of the immediate connection between the the "Anti Dog-Eat-Dog Act" of John Galt's world and the banal government takeover of private enterprise with Mr. Obama's "American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan." The $1 trillion deficits and the $1 trillion stimulus package are the downpayments in a bold mssion by Congress to buy out competition and force all sectors into attachments to the Department of Commerce and the Department of Labor. The Soviet "luminous future" is here with the TARP boondoggle that made the nine largest banks sell a share to the Treasury and thereby put the Treasury in charge. Who runs Citi and BofA? The Executive Branch. There is so strong a linkage between the dusty drift in Ayn Rand's dystopia of 1957 and the present drift by the American economy, where all private investment has been forced out or scared away, that it is now clear that what Ayn Rand (right) wrote about was not America in the 1950s but America in the 21st Century. America in 2009 is so driven by class warfare and big government fixes that it is now everything Lenin dreamed of -- a gigantic socialist state of obedient acolytes -- and America makes the modern Vladimir Putin Russia into an American stepchild. There are no credible banks in Russia. Hank Paulson owns control of all the banks who want to do business in America, domestic and foreign. And Mrs. Pelosi aims to raise taxes immediately, which will force out all the foreign investment and make certain the the US dollar is sovietized. Exaggerating? Not enough.
The House at Pooh Corner.
The news that the A.A. Milne estate will authorize a sequel, authored by David Benedictus, means that Winnie and his posse are due back into the global home
soon. The 100 Hundred Acre Wood ("100 Aker Wood") has dominated Anglophone children for eighty years, however most pertinent today is that Winne and Piglet and Eeyore first rose to dominance during the Great Depression. Winnine-the-Pohh (1926) and The House at Pooh Corner (1928) were sold into the stock market bubble that started after Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon's easy money ideas in 1926. You can see the bubble on a Dow Jones chart -- the Dow was at 100 in 1920 and again at 100 in 1926, but then by August and September of 1929 it rose to nearly 400. Winnie-the-Pooh is a bubble baby. Winnie survived the crash, and the plunge of the Dow to 50 in 1933, and the decades long drift that didn't see the Dow go to a new high until after 1959. How Winnie did this is that he stayed within his 100 Acre Wood, remained loyal to his eccentric, unangry and ineffective friends such as Piglet and Eeyore, and didn't ever learn what was wrong-headed about his foolish, futile appetite for honey no matter the risk. In sum, Winnie-the-Pooh was as much the perfect citizen for a command economy of drift as John Galt was the perfect dissident for a big government takeover of profit. Together they are the literary poles of 2009. Winnie will go along with the Congress and the Obama Administration when they bail out his underwater house and distribute equal honey pots to everyone; and John Galt will glower and skulk and endeavor to become a wrecker of the shining path of fairness and recovery. Impossible not to have affection for Winnie as he seeks to make do with less and comfort Piglet and humor Eeyore. Impossible not to cheer John Galt, wherever he is hiding in the mountains, a guerilla leader who will teach our children how to win again.
WE HAVE A VILLAIN. WE NEED AN ANALOGY.
Great stuff, John. But we also need a literary analogy with a villain who robs widows, orphans, charities, old people, very, very old people, trust funds, pension funds and anyone else who comes within range of his greed.
Somehow, even Ian Fleming's worst characters seems like nice guys compared to Madoff. How about Dickens or Dante? El Diablo fits the bill. Who else comes close?
Madoff, if guilty, is the singular argument for bringing back ritual murder. I'm sure there are a quite a number of people, who no longer have their glass houses and who would be happy to cast the first stone.
A young man whom I both envy and admire finds himself standing at the precipice. He has just finished earning his MA in communication/media from Leeds University in England. Now he is back in India looking for work. (The original plan was trying to find work in England.)
He is still awaiting answers to his numerous inquiries. In the meantime, it has been suggested that he pursue a doctoral degree with the expectation that in the near future world economic conditions will improve to the point where jobs will be once again plentiful.
To my mind, this is good advice. Additional education would accrue benefit to him in two important ways. One, it would give him the opportunity to sharpen the tools by which he could then jimmy (open) every door that may still be closed to him. Second, it would allow him to spend his time productively while the real world recovers from total economic collapse.
His principle argument against pursuing this course of action stems from a fear of being straight-jacketed into a career slide which he might not feel himself to be suited for. I, on the other hand, would argue that a PhD would hardly straight jacket anyone. The examples I would cite are Barrack Obama who studied law and is about to take the wheel of the hearse carrying the corpse of Uncle Sam (likely headed for Arlington); or Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, who once studied theology and rose quickly to the helm of one of the world’s most renowned terrorist organizations; ditto Khaled Mashal, who studied physics.
There are an almost infinite number of courses available to young people these days, many with good job prospects in the post-apocalyptic age. There is gender studies; micro- or macro economics; race relations; conflict resolution; etc., any one of which can practically guarantee a soft landing when everything else is collapsing all around. My own personal favorite is “martyrdom studies” now offered in many universities as a branch of Christian theology. The latter is perhaps the most challenging in that it promises only one chance to get it right.
John--I am so glad you linked to this article. It makes me see I am not the only person who looks at the daily headlines and wonders if he is living in a madhouse. I was going to email you about it but should've known you'd have seen it by now.
Rand's vision of a "Thompsonist" state was disturbingly prescient. I admire her for a lot of things, not the least of which was her sheer contempt for collectivism and "mysticism". As far as I am concerned, she is a hero. Her life story alone is the stuff of legend. The Russians have a deeper insight into the insidiousness of collectivism than almost anyone else.
Let's hope those banal minds in Washington don't run everything into the ground before those of us willing to really rebuild--without their morally disgusting "handouts"-- have the chance to say to them, "Get out of my way."
If I can add to the depressing state of affairs, I saw last night results of OB's focus groups on the how to "communicate" (you don't need a PHD for this!) the $1Trillion stimulus plan. They came away with such gems as "don't call it spending, call it "investment""; call the payments to non-taxpayers "tax cut: etc. the examples were insulting to a thinking person but there aren't too many of those left to worry about. Does this remind you of 1984 doublespeak?
Politicians have been spinning forever but now their efforts are virtually transparent. "this isn't root canal, it is "nerve ventilation."
Drudge tells us today US's obese now outweigh the merely overweight. Education is dummied down, everyone gets passing grades, etc. can't you see them all applauding as they get their "investment" checks--running out to get a Happy Meal and the newest xbox game, watching world wrestling on their 2nd monitor, dropped french fries working their way between the fat roles/rolls(?) ?
A new book is needed--"How a Conservative/Sane/Intelligent Person Prospers in a Collectivist World". Assuming all sanity is lost, one must now either join the zombies or adapt a new approach to self-interest.
I see Citi is now backing a fed plan to reduce mortgage principle in foreclosures. You don't think that has anything to do with the extensive voting rights of the Treasury on their board? that is scary as hell.
For what it is worth, Orwell notes the technique of "doublespeak" years before he gave it life in his book 1984, in an essay called Politics And The English Language, in which he calls for the use of "fresh metaphors" for finding new and creative ways to persuade people to your particular point of view. In contrast to this approach, he spends a great deal of the essay attacking the tired and deliberately misleading speech of (in his case English) politicians, who deliberately intend to hide the nature of their statements, rather than communicate them clearly.
What is REALLY scary about "doublespeak", is that in the highest form of it, the person using it is supposed to hold two diametrically opposed beliefs in mind when they think--even before they speak-- and so, in IngSoc, "taxation" and "investment" really is the same thing.
And aside from being Keynesians with a gullible citizenry under their heel, I am afraid virtually all of the incoming administration/house/congress really think in doublespeak...
To extend the Winnie-the-Pooh metaphor a bit further, Obama's call for a stimulus plan, coupled with all the alarmist talk about Obama on this website in the last couple of weeks, reminds me of Pooh trying to steal the honey from the trap and Piglet's reaction when he thinks he's caught a Heffalump. "Help! Help! A Horrible Heffalump!!"
Or, the time that Piglet has to be rescued by Christopher Robin and Pooh in an umbrella when the floodwaters rise - do we have a flood of sub-prime mortgage defaults, Henry Paulson as Christopher Robin, and TARP as the umbrella? Seems to me Milne was quite the socialist, when viewed in this light. It would have undoubtedly been better to let Piglet drown, although pork belly futures would have spiked upwards as a result. The market corrects everything in the end.
While I've always loved "Atlas Shrugged", now I find myself in a dilemma as a miniature John Galt myself - do I shrug and help the tax-and-spend policies to fail, or do I work even harder, because I love my country more than I hate the Democrats? Did Ayn Rand really love this country all that much, to suggest a strike, albeit by capitalists, that would cripple it? Makes me wonder - now, for the first time, whether I need to shrug, or keep carrying the world on my shoulders through the worst of times.
On October 3rd, 2008, we turned the corner and ceased to be what has been traditionally known as The United States of America. The sitting Republican president signed TARP (which had previously been passed by the Senate and House) into law.
Many were outraged by the speed with which such important legislation cleared Congress. Switchboards to the Capitol were jammed by irate constituents from throughout the country who recognized the significance of what was happening.
Actually, we had been hanging around this particular corner for some time. Not enough spoke up as our schools slipped into the role (not unlike Islamic madrassahs) of propaganda mills. We continued to patronize Hollywood. Some of us cancelled our subscriptions to The New York Times - that much is true. But the tenacity with which the Old Gray Lady (and others) would hang on should have been a signal to all of us that their lifeline was not dependent on normal economic channels. Something else was afoot.
We continued to listen to talk radio and (maybe) posted a few entries to blogs on like-minded conservative websites. After that, we went to bed. Now we are surprised how it could have happened that a man was elected to the highest office in the land who is unwilling even to produce a valid birth certificate.
We’ve turned the corner alright. I get a kick out of Larry Kudlow who to this day still says to give Obama a chance; that he still sees a silver lining in some of the president-elect’s appointments and unspoken policies; that there is still hope for an economic turn-around in’09. Doesn’t he realize - what has become all too evident in recent months; years – that what he (Kudlow) sees as a turn-around, others see as defeat? Obama told us what he was going to do. He will do it. Take him at his word. Hitler told the German people what he was going to do. They did not listen. Ahmadinejad tells us over and over again what he intends – again, we laugh it off. We refuse to engage.
A part of it stems from being busy with our daily lives; but most of it comes from a supreme arrogance that has us believing that everyone (in the world) thinks the same as we; that here are no enemies; that all disputes stem from mere misunderstanding. Who is it that is misunderstanding now? In the blink of an eye, we have become a socialist nation not unlike those of Eastern Europe during the cold war. And don’t tell me it was all a mistake; an unforeseen occurrence; a Black Swan, if you wish. No! It was carefully planned – the way 9/11 was. We know the names of the culprits. And not one of them is serving time in jail; in fact, we have assigned them the task of fixing the problem. “Fixing”? Really?!
It won’t be long now before (alternative) news sources are censored (they have told us); people with differing views will be harassed into obedience to the state; re-education centers set up (starting with pre K); gulags… (They have told us repeatedly exactly what it is they have in store for us.) Already there is talk of czars (is that an American word?). Soon fascist goons will be called out to maintain the peace.
Don’t you see the parallels to the Weimar Republic in this, our own situation? All that remains is for the reincarnation of Hitler to follow …then war. The red, white and blue mantle of Uncle Sam will be divided (as the good Russian professor predicted recently) among those capable of the worst brutalities. It is those whose boots we will be forced to lick while we kneel. Extreme? I don’t think so. How can it be otherwise? Obama has already said he would slash the defense budget and tear the heart out of the CIA. He will do it. Believe him! Familiarize yourselves with the new jargon, as Jim J suggests. The language you grew up with is now obsolete. Take the trouble to learn the new definitions of words. And you’ll see where we’re going as a country (in name only). That is, if you have the stomach for it.
Re "Did Ayn Rand really love this country all that much...?"
No, she did not.
Western intellectuals of a certain political bent cared about the Soviet Union only because of its socialist policies, not because they gave a damn about the unfortunate Slavs who served as test rats in Lenin's doomed social experiment. Similarly, Ayn Rand loved America’s capitalist ideas, not its people, whom she regarded as a mere epiphenomenon
Through the small Southern city where I live runs a river. Not long ago I read a very old woman's fascinating Depression-era account of growing up poor on its banks. What particularly struck me was her grateful remembrance of how a particular railroad engineer always made a point of shoveling some coal over the side of his train whenever it passed by the ramshackle slum where she lived. For her family and many others, that coal kept them from freezing in the depths of winter.
To me, that humble, anonymous engineer embodies the simple decency emblematic of America, but I am quite sure that poor, crazy Ayn Rand would have looked with disfavor upon him—after all, that lousy collectivist rat dared to give away the company's coal!--and the millions of other ordinary folk who have somehow kept this country going through good times and bad.
Jim - Mike Judge has already shown us, in his movie "Idiocracy", what the benign endgame is for our nation's trajectory. The malignant destiny is on display in Gaza.
Peter - we are bumbling toward civil war, between the producers and the consumers of the State's services, between the ants and the grasshoppers. A great deal of antipathy toward our insect alien overlords in DC bubbles beneath the surface. The President's approval rating is in the 20% range, the Congress at half that. This does not bode well when those same people take from your pocket at the point of a gun held by the IRS. Because the schools don't teach civics and economics, the people will have to learn the hard way - the school of hard knocks. The American people are resilient, and we know enough not to have much regard for the den of thieves in DC. But when we collectively experience the pain of a command economy under the new Komissars, attitudes will change rapidly. Perhaps we will repeat the Carter-Reagan progression, if we are lucky.
Ken - an individual who freely chooses to help others would not be chastised. We don't know what calculation the engineer made to assess the cost of giving the coal and the resulting benefit of doing so. Perhaps he was told to do so. Perhaps he did it of his own free will. Who's to say? I know that if I had access to the 45% of my income claimed by the State, I would be actively helping my local community. Instead, we 'gave at the office'. That is poison to the structure of communities.
Re "Idiocracy," the most slyly prophetic science fiction movie ever made. Mike Judge can count himself lucky that the neo-Lyseknoists who hold that early puppyhood intervention can make Afghan Hounds as smart as Border Collies never saw his radioactive little film, or else he'd be back home working the projector at some dusty Texas drive-in overrun with armadillos and tumbleweeds.
Re "We don't know what calculation the engineer made to assess the cost of giving the coal and the resulting benefit of doing so." My point wasn't about Objectivism, but rather about the ways in which intellectuals can value ideological purity over human decency, a subject that Dostoevsky covered quite well. In this respect Objectivists and Marxists are mirror twins.
In any case, like feminists, Objectivists seldom seem to get around to marrying and having kids, so their beliefs will soon be as extinct as the Shaker religion. Better to let nature take its course rather than attempt the daunting task of refuting the ideas of The Greatest Philosopher Since Aristotle.
Re "I know that if I had access to the 45% of my income claimed by the State, I would be actively helping my local community. Instead, we 'gave at the office'. That is poison to the structure of communities." Well said. You are absolutely correct.
It was employee theft ....
I prefer to think of it as human decency. The company pens and legal pads on my desk--now THAT'S straight up employee theft.
Lou:
There is such a thing as a creative destruction. Ayn Rand understood that. Striking was the only way to overcome the collectivist nightmare because people do not respond to plain reason. At some point, the producers have to get tired of footing the bill. I won't get into here, but the taxation Mrs Pelosi wants is nothing more than peonage or indentured servitude. Instead of wondering about whether or not certain companies can be allowed to fail, we should be asking why can't they? That is the root of the evil in communism and socialism: Politics decides who benefits. To me, this financial fiasco is starting to look more like the man caused global warming hoax every day. It's just another populist tool to manipulate and push us towards socialism.
JB:
Thank you for finally acknowledging Ayn Rand.
Ken:
Ayn Rand talked about rational self-interest. May be that engineer acted out of rational self-interest. Who knows. I will say that this country wasn't built on charity or what you call decency, but hard work and taking risks. If you want to get it from the horses mouth, look at the five part series here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzGFytGBDN8
Even better: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4doTzCs9lEc
Watch all three. Prescient?
Jim,
I know what you mean. Don't think I haven't gone over that already in my head. But I think we need a movement with heart, and Objectivism doesn't have heart that I can see. I liked what Kenneth Stevens said earlier in this thread; I want to be one of the "millions of ordinary folk who do what it takes to keep this country going, in good times and in bad." I think it's pretty close to what Ralph Waldo Emerson was advocating in his book "Self-Reliance". I like Emerson's take on it more than Rand's.
Lou:
THe problem with objectivism is that it doesn't integrate emotions and rationalism. We aren't Vulcans, but humans. THe other thing, it sets a high standard that can lead to feelings of guilt and failure if you can't attain what she espouses. Not everyone is Howard Roark or Dagny Taggart, and honestly, they were incomplete and flawed people in spite of their achievements. As far as Ken's description of an engineer throwing coal off the train, that is not self-reliance, but charity. Self-reliance takes hard work, taking risks and perseverance.
Self-reliance is not the only good, any more than charity is. The fatal problem with ideology--feminism, Marxism, Objectivism, whatever--is that it takes one good and raises it above all other goods. Ultimately this leads to human beings doing inhuman things to each other in the name of the higher good.
Kenneth,
Emerson never suggested that self-reliance should be practiced at the expense of charity, or compassion. All the great philanthropists of the 20th century were extremely self-reliant according to my understanding of the meaning. Now, if you interpret self-reliance as becoming an isolated hermit with no interaction with the rest of society, then yes, it could end up being destructive.
I believe in capitalism not because I want money, but because the ability to keep the fruits of my own labor is a prime source of happiness for me. I'd rather have $10,000 that I made selling widgets than a welfare check from the government for $100,000, any day. And I'd be more disposed to helping an out-of-work neighbor down the block with that $10,000, as well.
Agreed. I was blurry with sleep this morning, and not exactly at my most pellucid. I tried to clarify matters in a followup post that doesn't seem to have made it here, probably because I drowsily hit the wrong button or something. Caffeine...must have caffeine...
Well Ken, at some point the highest good may be for ourselves, for if not for us, who will be? I have found that in the end, all I can really count on is myself. Given particular circumstances, any of us come up second best in regards to others. It's a foundation. After that, If I can afford to help someone else and it makes sense, I will.
fantastic post!! if any of your readers are interested in quality ARCH SUPPORTS just click the highlighted links.